Back
MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT
D.K. Paliwal, J.
Abdul Vasim - Appellant
Versus
State of M.P. - Respondent
M.Cr.C. No. 1484-2014
Decided On : 11-07-2014
Anticipatory Bail - M.P. Excise Act and Pashu Krurata Adhiniyam - The court allowed the anticipatory bail application of the applicant, who was apprehending arrest in connection with the offence under the M.P. Excise Act and Pashu Krurata Adhiniyam, based on the lack of direct implication in the FIR and discrepancies in the prosecution's case.
Fact of the Case:
The applicant filed a bail application under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C. apprehending arrest in connection with a case involving the M.P. Excise Act and Pashu Krurata Adhiniyam. The prosecution alleged that the applicant was involved in transporting liquor and buffaloes without a license.
Finding of the Court:
The court allowed the bail application, noting that the applicant was not directly named in the FIR and discrepancies in the prosecution's case, such as the later addition of incriminating details in the co-accused's memorandum.
Issues: Implication of the applicant in the case, demand for bribe by the police, and discrepancies in the prosecution's case.
Ratio Decidendi: The court granted anticipatory bail based on the lack of direct implication in the FIR and discrepancies in the prosecution's case, indicating potential falsity of the allegations against the applicant.
Final Decision: The court allowed the anticipatory bail application, directing the applicant to furnish a personal bond and surety bond, cooperate in the investigation, and remain available for interrogation. The order remained operative for sixty days, allowing the applicant to move a regular bail application during this period.
D.K. Paliwal, J.
1. Heard.
2. This is the first bail application filed by the applicant under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C. for grant of anticipatory bail.
3. The applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No. 273/2013 registered at P.S. Dharnavada, District Guna for the offence punishable under sections 34(2) of M.P. Excise Act and under Section 11(A) of Pashu Krurata Adhiniyam.
4. As per the prosecution case, during checking near railway gate Truck bearing No. MP-08-GA-1367 was signalled to stop but driver of the vehicle started running away. The Police force followed the truck and stopped. After checking eight buffaloes and two Cans containing 55-55 litres country made liquor were found. There was no license. The driver disclosed his name Mehboob and the conductor disclosed his name Shahid Khan. During investigation it was disclosed that the liquor as well as the truck belongs to Abdul Vasim.
5. It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that applicant has falsely been implicated. He has not committed any offence. He is not named in the FIR. The applicant is engaged in selling of buffaloes. He has purchased the buffaloes. It is further submitted that he was not present at the spot. The buffaloes were released on Supurdgi and the applicant has taken the buffaloes on Supurdgi on 1.11.2013. Till then no case was registered against the applicant. It is submitted that concerning Police has demanded Rs. One lac and also snatched Rs. 35,000/- from him. The complaint has lodged to SP, Guna, then false case has been registered against him.
6. The prayer is opposed by the learned Public Prosecutor.
7. Case diary perused. It appears that in the report the applicant is not named. The applicant has been involved in the case on the basis of the memorandum of the co-accused Shahid. It appears that in the memorandum it has been added later on that Vasim has given liquor in two Cans and eight buffaloes at Guna. From the naked eyes it appears that this has been added later on. Considering the allegation against the applicant and the aforesaid facts, this application is allowed and it is directed that in the event of arrest, the applicant shall be enlarged on bail on his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 50,000/- (Rs. Fifty Thousand Only) with a surety bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of Arresting officer/competent Court. The applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required and he will co-operate in the investigation. He shall further abide by the other conditions enumerated in sub-section (2) of Section 438 of Cr.P.C.
8. This order shall remain operative for a period of sixty days and during this period the applicant is free to move the regular bail application before the concerned Court.
9. C.C. as per rules.
AI
The main legal point established in the judgment is the binding effect of the settlement between the parties, the waiver of the right to seek re-employment by the workmen, and the entitlement of the ....
A lockout is justified if it is declared in response to an illegal strike or a strike that is in breach of a settlement or award.
The combination of eyewitness testimonies, recovery of the weapon used, and forensic examination results can establish guilt in criminal cases, even based on circumstantial evidence.
The conviction of an accused person under Section 27(3) of the Arms Act is not permissible in law if the accused is also charged with committing murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
The court can enhance compensation based on the deceased's income and family dependency, and adjust the multiplier used by the Tribunal if found unjustified.
A valid signature must be in the candidate's own handwriting, as emphasized by the General Clauses Act and relevant case law.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
